Where to post NSFW entries?

A model and a makeup artist

I’d like a show of hands:

  • Who would prefer NSFW images and texts here, mixed with politics, firearms and other topics?
  • Who would prefer I start a separate blog where things you can’t unsee would show up?
This entry was posted in advice requested and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

47 Responses to Where to post NSFW entries?

  1. Linoge says:

    I don’t mind the mix-and-match format. It’s kind of become expected here.

  2. Dominic Massa says:

    I think it might be a good idea to have a separate site for NSFW content, only because the political content would not be taken as seriously because of its proximity to what some might object to. I think most of your audience wouldn’t mind, but someone looking into your work for job purposes might not dig it. This is all speculation, of course.

  3. Alan Chambers says:

    Whatever is easiest for you. You do tasteful nudes, not porn. I think people are a little to easily offended these days.

    • Oleg Volk says:

      You’ve obviously not seen my photos of open-bolt submachine guns doing the nasty with sound suppressors. Spent casings all over the place, to say nothing of Ballistol splatter!

  4. Mike says:

    Given how many companies ban any mention of guns, I can’t say it makes much difference to see peoples fun bits.

    OTOH lots of people who are fine with nice tools and violence go entirely squicktified at s-e-x or sexuality.

  5. eriko says:

    What Alan said. You post lovely pictures. Some have less cloths that others. They are still lovely pictures.

  6. Cork (Blaine) Byers says:

    I would like them all here. I like a one-stop shop when it comes to your site. I visit daily and will continue to do so!

  7. Mrs.W says:

    (“can’t unsee”. I had to laugh at how you phrased that.)
    As a self-identified prude I’d say it’s probably wiser to have a separate section.
    But then again, idk, I prefer to decide what is inappropriate for myself. Even my hubby and I don’t agree on some individual images or contexts. More skin does not necessarily equal inappropriate and I think that’s a real problem with American perceptions.
    Course my office is in the wilderness so I don’t have a boss looking over my shoulder or legalistic policies to deal with. Students may have restrictions as well. Strictly in regards to that, having a separate section makes more sense and is respectful.
    However, by labeling something NSFW you may inadvertently shadow some of your work with a more “porny” feel so it isn’t taken as seriously. But then, perhaps some of your work is meant to be that way.
    So there ya go – I guess I have no helpful hand raising but I muddied the waters nicely for you instead. ‘Welcome

    Maybe tag them “Potentially NSFW”?

    • Oleg Volk says:

      I tag stuff already, but it seems non-obvious to Facebook viewers. And it’s not just nudity, could be scare or macabre images.

  8. TJ says:

    Hell to the yes! To both!

  9. Lupis42 says:

    Mixed is easier for me, andI can look at firearms at work without issue.

  10. Youngblood says:

    I look at gun pics at work because I work at a gun place. Nice to be able to do so without getting fired for the other pics lol.

  11. htom trites says:

    My own taste is mixed; I have seen nothing that offended me (and much that might have offended someone, especially those allergic to firearms and/or skin.) That said, it might be better for others — and perhaps you — to have them more separate.

    Sad that freedom of speech has come to this.

  12. Jim says:

    I would like a separate section just so it would be easier to find the NSFW stuff.

  13. Tony Lekas says:

    Together is fine although if you make them separate maybe it will lead to your posting more NSFW material which could be good.

  14. Farm.Dad says:

    where ever you decide I will be glad to follow along.

  15. David says:

    Where you decide, but I’m fine with here – makes things easier to find your work.

  16. Vlad G. says:

    I say keep it all together on 1 blog.

  17. Scott says:

    Where ever I can find your work. It is always tasteful and pleasant to look at. You are a treasure and blessed.

  18. James Lenaburg says:

    Post it here I love your photography.

  19. Robert says:

    Option 1. I enjoy the full mix.

  20. The Neon Madman says:

    Mixed is easier, but perhaps under the fold?

  21. Graham B says:

    Filth it up. Let the over age children play with their dolls while the adults enjoy your art.

  22. Just post them here. Frequently!

  23. LarryArnold says:

    My vote is it ain’t broke.

    If a problem arises, then fix it.

  24. Gar Nelson says:

    I enjoy your photography, and sense of humor. However it works out easiest for you is fine with me, though I do have the advantage of not being in an office environment anymore (there is no NSFW when you don’t work). 🙂

  25. Paul Rain says:

    I think the way it works at present is fine for your audience. I suspect most of the people who keep an eye on your content are cultural libertarians- not full on libertine neurodiversity and polyamory advocates, but the sort of people who maybe used to follow Adam Kokesh but have grown up. They aren’t going to be bothered by this stuff.

    I doubt that taking the newds off the main blog would draw in many kosher conservatives, nor my kind of people- who are more inspired by pictures of constitutional self-defence in action, like the Algiers Point militia.

  26. Weetabix says:

    I say keep it all together. As someone else said, your stuff is tasteful. Put things below the fold like you’ve always done (or after the jump or whatever you internet experts call it.)

  27. Peter says:

    I don’t mind the mixed format. However, I think that those that suggest separation of the gun content for “seriousness” have a point.

  28. Pingback: FB is as usual. | VolkStudio Blog

  29. Chris says:

    Set up two different feeds on your blog (RSS is what I’m talking about). One for politics and one for photog stuff. I follow you through Feedly.

  30. Geoff says:

    Soooooo, male nipples OK, female not so much.
    Is that what it is with FB?
    Sounds like sex discrimination to me.

  31. The Infamous Oregon Lawhobbit says:

    Keep it as is.

  32. jon spencer says:

    Under the fold.

  33. Matt says:

    look at MeWe as and alternative to FB. I don’t know if it supports NSFW. Post what you want where you want. A warning to NSFW content is ok and courteous.

  34. Jonathan T says:

    I view your blog as an artist’s portfolio.
    If what I want is political commentary I go to
    Gunrightsmedia.com or elsewhere.
    I like thing the way they are.

  35. Don McGaffey says:

    I am more and more concerned with the efforts by Facebook, Microsoft, and Googler to take over the world. They are in 2016 competing to be the Big Brother imaged in 1984.
    That said, I have a link to your site, and visit as appropriate.
    Images of people are the last remnamt of humanity, and they are determined to take that away.
    Post all on your site. Be RealBook instead of Zuckerfake.
    ~ Don McGaffey
    Facebook blocked Civil RightsKeeper.

  36. Louis says:

    Thanks for the opportunity to offer an opinion on what to do regarding what some call NSFW images. I have noticed that you frequently post imagery of the young engaged in the shooting discipline and you have emphasized the guidance of adults who promote safety. All of these things are valuable and you are to be commended for those works. Some adults, Christian adults would not find NSFW images suitable for themselves nor their young and likely besides being offended would not make the effort to screen the site content for their young, a group that is the future of firearms ownership. I have co-workers who read movie reviews at a Christian review site before allowing their kids to go view a particular movie. I am likely a minority here but my input is this: Remove NSFW content from this site so that visitors of all ages and faiths can come here and benefit.

    • Oleg Volk says:

      THAT has been the main concern I had — you articulated it well.

    • Jason Davidoff says:

      Imagine how much more logical and reasonable and peaceful the world would be without the religious fanatics, and peoples’ fear of them.

      • Weetabix says:

        I don’t think Louis came off as fanatic at all. He’s voicing an opinion about choices he makes while making no demands. Sounded pretty reasonable to me.

        • Jason Davidoff says:

          Because some people who want his money told him so, he thinks his imaginary friend would get mad at photographs of humans.

          If that’s not the thinking of a six year old, what is?

          Yet reasonable and sane adults are somehow expected to take these superstitions into account.

          • Oleg Volk says:

            I take that into account same way I don’t serve coffee to Mormons or eggplant to friends who just don’t care for the taste. It doesn’t bother me to accommodate good people of my own free will.

  37. Weetabix says:

    So, what’s the new site? I’ll add it to my daily list right after this one.

Comments are closed.